HomePod - it’s a thing now

I pointed this out a page or two ago, but with the HomePod sitting in between my AUdioengine A5s that were spaced ~2ft apart I peferred the sound of the HomePod on most pieces of music I listened to. The A5s are considered to be quite decent bookshelves in the sub $500 range last time I checked. YMMV, sound is subjective, etc.

When it came to filling the room in all directions there was no contest of course - the near omnidirectional sound from the HomePod is awesome in that regard and I’m really looking forward to being able to sync two of them.

Am I the only one having trouble wrapping their mind around "audiophile quality" and "mono" being used together?

No, it bothers me too, if only because the idea of transcendant sound has always meant stereo to me, and sitting in that spooky sweet spot where the speakers disappear and music is only directional by specific design. But, I'm going to give the HomePod the benefit of the doubt that the overall sound-stage and audio projection will make up for it in terms of making music sound pleasant. But that's going to be subjective, of course. The music I like that uses stereo imaging for specific effect (like a lot of older Pink Floyd) is better listened to on headphones anyway, IMO.

Here's a question that occurred to me: I wonder how the HomePod sounds outside? Like on a deck or patio or some such? Given that it's easily portable, just needing an outlet, I would think it would be natural to move it around the house or onto an outdoor living area (if I got one to use as an AirPlay speaker, I certainly would want to do that since it's almost always deck weather here in CO), but I wonder how the lack of reflecting surfaces in an environment like that would boggle its algorithms and diminish the sound quality.

Anyone have a HomePod and live in an area that isn't miserably cold right now want to try it out and report back?

Heh never thought about it but I guess the idea of stereo separation is kind of at odds with the kind of omnidirectional audio they're going for here. Anyway wouldn't the anechoic chamber testing be similar to an outdoor area with (effectively) no wall bouncing? Although technically unless you raised it there'd still be the surface it's sitting on.

Oh I get all that. And it may be great for a single speaker. I'm fine thinking through tradeoffs. I just find using "audiophile quality" relative to such a device to be deeply problematic. My guess is that if you already have a few reasonably quality speakers at the same cost and cables in your wall to give true stereo let alone 5.1 it's going to sound remarkably better.

You’re going to need more than “reasonable” quality, well over $350 and some time spent configuring the system and the room to get equal or better sound. You’re right in so far that as it stands today your reasonable system will, by default, provide a more accurate stereo image. How accurate will depend on speaker placement and the room. I’m not fond of listening to stereo recordings on 5.1 systems though I have heard SACDs mastered for 5.1 that I found impressive (so long as you have the time to go to your special listening room.) Also, 5.1 systems, particularly lower cost systems, always sound bass heavy to me. Great for Apocalypse Now, but not ideal for Flight of the Valkyries.

Dark Side Of The Moon aside, stereo does not inherently mean better and I’ll take clean mono over shit stereo every time.

The only problem I have with reviews of Apple products in general is the level of vitriol that comes with anything but universal praise. Audiophiles love the HomePod! ... That is, until we find an audiophile that takes issue with some minutae, then it's fuck audiophiles.

Now cateye you *know* that isn’t me at all. I’ve *always* said “fuck audiophiles”, because quite frankly I think they’re mostly full of shit because (you know) even the best human hearing simply degrades as time goes on— right to the fucking point that they “need” instrumentation to show what they believe, not that they can actually hear the shit after 50 and dropping fast each year after.

Ok, I’m going to go ahead and entertain Ziontrain’s position—that the HomePod really isn’t best in class and that the review from the audiophile community is full of shit and completely suspect. Now what? He doesn’t offer a source he considers completely objective. So, where do so go to get pristine, unbiased data? Not that it’s required since this thing keeps getting great reviews for the most part. That tells me it’s going to be a great product for 99.9% of the people who enjoy listening to their music.

So again, where do we go to get the data and review for audio that’s on par with say Sonara over at DisplayMate for screen and color?

Oh, I wasn’t calling you out in particular, Ed. It’s just not often that we get a whole new product from Apple, but the reactions among the broader sphere of Apple users have been predictable and a little disquieting. It just makes me appreciate our community here all the more, because even when we’re pissed (or, for that matter, elated), at least we try to have some reason behind it.

This reminds me of when I caved in and got a set of Beats headphones. I remember listening to them and thinking, “I shouldn’t like how bottom heavy these sound, but I don’t care. I kinda do.” And I never worried about it again.

I'm really struggling with the HomePod - I want one. Kinda like how I wanted an iSub and soundsticks back in the day. I ended up buying them.

But when I critically think about it, for my usage, the HomePod seems superfluous and dumb. In my living room, I already have my home theater system. It's not top-notch, but I sincerely doubt the HomePod can beat 5.1 surround with a dedicated sub. In the kitchen, I have a chintzy bluetooth speaker. But I'm really not expecting much sound quality over the sound of the hood vent and the stir-fry. My iPhone is always on the counter with a recipe. Sometimes I "Hey, Siri," for a timer. In my office, I have my headphones. I can't think of another room in the house where I'd even want, much less need, a speaker. Other than a bluetooth light dimmer, I have zero home automation.

I'm really struggling with the HomePod - I want one. Kinda like how I wanted an iSub and soundsticks back in the day. I ended up buying them.

But when I critically think about it, for my usage, the HomePod seems superfluous and dumb. In my living room, I already have my home theater system. It's not top-notch, but I sincerely doubt the HomePod can beat 5.1 surround with a dedicated sub. In the kitchen, I have a chintzy bluetooth speaker. But I'm really not expecting much sound quality over the sound of the hood vent and the stir-fry. My iPhone is always on the counter with a recipe. Sometimes I "Hey, Siri," for a timer. In my office, I have my headphones. I can't think of another room in the house where I'd even want, much less need, a speaker. Other than a bluetooth light dimmer, I have zero home automation.

Where are people putting these things?

Bedroom or home office.

In my case, moving between. At least for now. If stereo becomes a thing, and proves up to snuff, I eventually see two in the office, one in bedroom, one in shop and one for the “main level” — living room/kitchen space. (Imagine the opposite of anechoic). Going to take some time to collect though — unless I decide to offload some surplus gear come Spring.

And exactly what means does Apple have of “disciplining” this guy — Phil and Eddy are going to show up with lead pipes? (I suppose they could take Dre with them.) Seriously, do you believe he going to be that concerned about whether or not he gets to buy a hypothetical Apple product a week early next time around?

Why the comedy show instead facing the facts head on?

If he had to sign and NDA to get the product. You and I know that the sanction for a bad review would be not getting the product on next release. In this day and age when "reviewers" compete to get access, it's very obvious what the sanction can be.

You do yourself no credit by playing games.

Like I said there's plenty of time to get more info on the product. But it's not useful to just uncritically swallow hype.

And I said I was agreeing with you. You (we) don’t know, so you are welcome.

With that out of the way, I don’t believe you ever answered explained where you believe the answer will come from. Who would you consider the “DisplayMate” of audio? Which source will you acknowledge as legit?

Quote:

Like I said there's plenty of time to get more info on the product. But it's not useful to just uncritically swallow hype.

If he had to sign and NDA to get the product. You and I know that the sanction for a bad review would be not getting the product on next release. In this day and age when "reviewers" compete to get access, it's very obvious what the sanction can be.

It is a fact that an NDA was signed. I’m not accepting, as fact, that the signing of an NDA corrupted the data. You accuse me of uncritical acceptance of hype without acknowledging the data or my ability to read and interpret it. As for playing games, yes I made a joke—it’s how I talk and write. I don’t concede that getting early access to an Apple product is anything more than a cool happenstance for the “reviewer”. I don’t see that he necessarily expects future access and the importance to him is uncertain at best. He’s not making his living reviewing gadgets. These are all “facts” not in evidence and you’ve yet to establish how they would have corrupted the data.

My apologies if these ideas were shrouded in humor. Actually, fuck that. I’m not going to apologize for going for a non-offensive laugh line—for that matter I’m generally disinclined to apologize for being offensive. We need more Comedy Show in life and I’m going to keep on expressing myself accordingly.

All that being said, it would be disingenuous of me not to inform this forum that WinterCharm has conceded that his findings are inconclusive because they weren’t performed in anechoic chamber:

Quote:

EDIT: before you read any further, please read /u/edechamps excellent reply to this post and then read this excellent discussion between him and /u/Ilkless about measuring, conventions, some of the mistakes I've made, and how the data should be interpreted. His conclusion, if I'm reading it right, is that these measurements are largely inconclusive, since the measurements were not done in an anechoic chamber. Since I dont have one of those handy, these measurements should be taken with a brick of salt. I still hope that some of the information in here, the discussion, the guesses, and more are useful to everyone. This really is a new type of speaker (again see the discussion) and evaluating it accurately is bloody difficult.

Whether or not the HomePod is truly a capital-A Audiophile speaker remains unimportant. The experiment was interesting. The debate of the experiment was useful and educational. Despite the concession, I remain uncertain that the test was completely bogus — but that’s an academic point. The speaker still sounds great and I stand by the “educated but subjective” observations I’ve shared. Call me DJ Hype Machine.

He’s either a pre-med college student or a med student doing audio stuff as a hobby. That puts him at 18-26 at the most. He’s buried under debt right now but depending on how far along he is and what choices he makes for specialization in 5-15 years he’ll be making more than everybody in that room but the executives; 3 times easy as much as the journos (if not more) and more than most of the engineers that made it. He’s not a journalist, he doesn’t depend on access for his career. This is just a fun distraction for him (and take it from me med students are in desperate need of fun distractions that don’t involve copious, excessive amounts of alcohol). Even if Apple were to jerk early access to products he’ll shrug his shoulders and find another hobby, or even continue the same hobby without the early access. What he won’t do is worry about a potentially jeopardized career. Apple just doesn’t have that much leverage on him.

WinterCharm has conceded that his findings are inconclusive because they weren’t performed in anechoic chamber

And this is my beef with the audiophile snobs. They’re worse than the fucking beer snobs. You don’t need to be a fucking meteorologist to identify a beautiful day weather-wise. It’s just as ridiculous to try and compare those days in an attempt to determine which is “better”.

Who the fuck lives in an “anechoic chamber”? Who’d want to constantly live in such an environment? Our world and it’s environments are dynamic changing and from what I’ve been reading the HomePod bests all others regarding audio quality and in simplicity of adapting to any environment. Once you need to go to those lengths—the NthDegree of absurdity—you’ve completely missed the target.

For YEARS I’ve listened to music snobs and audiophiles trying to explain “better sound” while dropping GOBS OF $$$ over and over again as the next best come along. All as their hearing declines with each next purchase.They’re in the hunt for the gold at the end of the rainbow. These folks just don’t get that it simply doesn’t exist.

I can’t repeat this enough, listening [for sounds] and hearing aren’t skills that you can develop and get better at over time. In fact the mere act of doing it more often simply accelerates the decline over time; ditto with increases in volume. Time might be up for the companies peddling outrageously expensive home audio gear—maybe even up for the companies selling commercial sound gear. Why pay Tons if $$$ when you’ve already reached a point where it’s as good as it’s going to get for human hearing? Damn right these audio companies should be afraid. Just like the music player market, the phone market and the snobs in the Swiss Watch market that came before. And it’s not the HomePod specifically that these companies should fear, but rather [Apple] in general.

Apple has the size, scope, and reach. Apple is also resource-rich, disciplined and laser-focused AND they possess the chops/skill sets to be able to flatten (pun intended) the snake oil market of “high end audio”. What other company will be doing real-time dynamic environment analysis and making the necessary adjustments allowing consistency at all points at all times? (Aside: how’s TAG making out in the Smart Watch market?) These speaker companies may have the audio skill set, but they lack any expertise in making their wares “smart” while also keeping setup DEAD SIMPLE—take out of box and plug in.

I would imagine that Apple will soon allow for nNumber of these things to be placed about a room (or home) and have them work in harmony. I’m sure there’ll be a scramble to make competing “smart audio speakers”. By the time they come up with something, Apple will have refined their audio tech further.

If he had to sign and NDA to get the product. You and I know that the sanction for a bad review would be not getting the product on next release. In this day and age when "reviewers" compete to get access, it's very obvious what the sanction can be.

It is a fact that an NDA was signed. I’m not accepting, as fact, that the signing of an NDA corrupted the data. You accuse me of uncritical acceptance of hype without acknowledging the data or my ability to read and interpret it. As for playing games, yes I made a joke—it’s how I talk and write. I don’t concede that getting early access to an Apple product is anything more than a cool happenstance for the “reviewer”. I don’t see that he necessarily expects future access and the importance to him is uncertain at best. He’s not making his living reviewing gadgets. These are all “facts” not in evidence and you’ve yet to establish how they would have corrupted the data.

My apologies if these ideas were shrouded in humor. Actually, fuck that. I’m not going to apologize for going for a non-offensive laugh line—for that matter I’m generally disinclined to apologize for being offensive. We need more Comedy Show in life and I’m going to keep on expressing myself accordingly.

All that being said, it would be disingenuous of me not to inform this forum that WinterCharm has conceded that his findings are inconclusive because they weren’t performed in anechoic chamber:

Quote:

EDIT: before you read any further, please read /u/edechamps excellent reply to this post and then read this excellent discussion between him and /u/Ilkless about measuring, conventions, some of the mistakes I've made, and how the data should be interpreted. His conclusion, if I'm reading it right, is that these measurements are largely inconclusive, since the measurements were not done in an anechoic chamber. Since I dont have one of those handy, these measurements should be taken with a brick of salt. I still hope that some of the information in here, the discussion, the guesses, and more are useful to everyone. This really is a new type of speaker (again see the discussion) and evaluating it accurately is bloody difficult.

Whether or not the HomePod is truly a capital-A Audiophile speaker remains unimportant. The experiment was interesting. The debate of the experiment was useful and educational. Despite the concession, I remain uncertain that the test was completely bogus — but that’s an academic point. The speaker still sounds great and I stand by the “educated but subjective” observations I’ve shared. Call me DJ Hype Machine.

Why would you conduct the experiments of a speaker that is expressly designed to take into account room reflection in an anechoic chamber? Makes no sense to me. The only caveat is that those experiments reflect his room acoustics and YMMV.

I can’t repeat this enough, listening [for sounds] and hearing aren’t skills that you can develop and get better at over time. In fact the mere act of doing it more often simply accelerates the decline over time

One quibble. While you are correct in stating one can’t train oneself to hear, one can definitely learn to listen. (I mean this in the “music” sense but of course this is also true for social interaction.)

It doesn't really matter that the review was retracted as the damage is done and I doubt you will see any of the Apple fan sites report the retraction. The era of fake news. The author of the piece will go on writing reviews for magazines and get future invites to Apple events; life goes on.

It doesn't really matter that the review was retracted as the damage is done and I doubt you will see any of the Apple fan sites report the retraction. The era of fake news. The author of the piece will go on writing reviews for magazines and get future invites to Apple events; life goes on.

It wasn't retracted. It was noted that since his measurements weren't taken in an anechoic chamber, they may be inconclusive, so take that into consideration. That's not the same as "retracted" – the author still appears to believe that the HomePod is an excellent speaker. It seems odd to decry "fake news" while you sensationalize what was actually stated.

Quote:

EDIT: before you read any further, please read /u/edechamps excellent reply to this post and then read this excellent discussion between him and /u/Ilkless about measuring, conventions, some of the mistakes I've made, and how the data should be interpreted. His conclusion, if I'm reading it right, is that these measurements are largely inconclusive, since the measurements were not done in an anechoic chamber. Since I dont have one of those handy, these measurements should be taken with a brick of salt. I still hope that some of the information in here, the discussion, the guesses, and more are useful to everyone. This really is a new type of speaker (again see the discussion) and evaluating it accurately is bloody difficult.

Retracted? Either the thing sounds awesome or it doesn't. By all accounts it does.

Take this excerpt from the reddit thread:

Quote:

First of all, it is impossible to accurately measure a speaker in a normal room.

Once you read shit like that you know the poster is full of shit because that’s exactly where most all speakers important to folks living their lives exist and that’s the best fucking environment to test them in.

The whole point of this is Apple sending a message to these folks putting them on notice that any further contortive explanations are only going to make them look that much more absurd. These folks have a vested interest in getting you to believe that the more you spend, the better sound experience you’ll have.

Apple is touting smarts and real-time adaptability to any given environment without any need of know anything about “setup”.

It wasn't retracted. It was noted that since his measurements weren't taken in an anechoic chamber, they may be inconclusive, so take that into consideration. That's not the same as "retracted" – the author still appears to believe that the HomePod is an excellent speaker. It seems odd to decry "fake news" while you sensationalize what was actually stated.

Fair enough but the author still didn't explain why he fudged the graphs to support his conclusion (but hey, why would that matter?). As for fake news, you think any of the Apple news outlets ran this story because a random redditor said the Homepod was excellent, or was it because he provided detailed data to back up his findings? Data now that the author says are largely inconclusive.

Retracted? Either the thing sounds awesome or it doesn't. By all accounts it does.

Take this excerpt from the reddit thread:

Quote:

First of all, it is impossible to accurately measure a speaker in a normal room.

Once you read shit like that you know the poster is full of shit because that’s exactly where most all speakers important to folks living their lives exist and that’s the best fucking environment to test them in.

The whole point of this is Apple sending a message to these folks putting them on notice that any further contortive explanations are only going to make them look that much more absurd. These folks have a vested interest in getting you to believe that the more you spend, the better sound experience you’ll have.

Apple is touting smarts and real-time adaptability to any given environment without any need of know anything about “setup”.

That is probably worded incorrectly, you measure in an anechoic chamber because otherwise those numbers mean diddly squat since usually no one else has the exact same room with the exact same shit in the same place so not reproducable.

What i would like to see are numbers of several kind of different speakers in the same room, better numbers mean it has the capacity to sound better, now whether it sounds better is an entirely different thing that only you can say. but it's a start.

And before you jump at me for needing numbers instead of actually listening to it, take into account not everyone lives in the US, we don't have the same return X days and get your money back guarantee, I have like 3 pairs/sets of headphones because of that

I suspect the tech in the HomePod will make it impossible to provide accurate measurements. Double blind listening tests in various rooms and changing the speakers locations (or moving the listeners around), would probably be the best way to test the HomePod

First of all, it is impossible to accurately measure a speaker in a normal room.

Once you read shit like that you know the poster is full of shit because that’s exactly where most all speakers important to folks living their lives exist and that’s the best fucking environment to test them in.

I think you”re missing the point a bit. If you can’t reproduce a flat response in a chamber, you’re never going to be able to do so in a normal room. What you’re learning from testing in a chamber is the limit of the devices ability to reproduce a flat response. That’s a useful piece of information.

Then the second question is, how close to that limit does the speaker come in various household situations.

It would stand to reason that a smart speaker would be better at adapting to room configurations and therefore come closer to its optimal response in a greater variety of situations than a non-smart speaker. That’s probably not that controversial. But what seems to be impressing people is that it’s optimal response seems to be a shitload better than they were expecting out of a device of this size. In other words, it’s not just the smarts that seem to be making this a great speaker.

Or you know, practicing medicine, but please don’t let that alter your head canon.

.. and walking and eating as well. Are you claiming he doesn't write reviews for magazines or just being pedantic?

Not intentionally. I was under the impression that writing reviews was a sideline and not a big deal for him, but I’ll concede that’s an impression, not something I’m certain of. In my mind it’s similar to labeling me a “photojournalist” because my images and words occassionaly appear(ed) in Land-Rover magazines and the odd (local) newspaper. My impression is that too much is being made of his role as “reviewer”, particularly because by his own admission he’s buying the stuff he reviews — he’s not on a PR gravy train.

“You” (that’s a collective you) make too much of it. I downplay it, perhaps to excess. Let’s find middle ground.

Not intentionally. I was under the impression that writing reviews was a sideline and not a big deal for him, but I’ll concede that’s an impression, not something I’m certain of. In my mind it’s similar to labeling me a “photojournalist” because my images and words occassionaly appear(ed) in Land-Rover magazines and the odd (local) newspaper. My impression is that too much is being made of his role as “reviewer”, particularly because by his own admission he’s buying the stuff he reviews — he’s not on a PR gravy train.

“You” (that’s a collective you) make too much of it. I downplay it, perhaps to excess. Let’s find middle ground.

I'm under the same impression; just a side hobby that nets him some extra cash. That said, Apple marketing seems very savvy on who attends private events.

This is descending into the sort of pedantry that makes my eyes water.

I'm not sure why it's becoming a point of contention that there are two clear ways to evaluate a product that generates or reproduces sound: By the numbers (requiring the use of controlled environments and some level of adherence to the scientific method, otherwise the data is inherently flawed), or experientially: How do I think it sounds in my home, using the music I like, under the conditions I'm likely to experience?

Two reviews conducted using each of these methods don't have to agree, either, for it to be a successful product (hell, look at Beats headphones). Both review formats have value to different audiences. Is this actually controversial?

You’re going to need more than “reasonable” quality, well over $350 and some time spent configuring the system and the room to get equal or better sound. You’re right in so far that as it stands today your reasonable system will, by default, provide a more accurate stereo image. How accurate will depend on speaker placement and the room. I’m not fond of listening to stereo recordings on 5.1 systems though I have heard SACDs mastered for 5.1 that I found impressive (so long as you have the time to go to your special listening room.) Also, 5.1 systems, particularly lower cost systems, always sound bass heavy to me. Great for Apocalypse Now, but not ideal for Flight of the Valkyries.

Dark Side Of The Moon aside, stereo does not inherently mean better and I’ll take clean mono over shit stereo every time.

I find classical music with a concert hall DSP set on a 5.1 system sound pretty amazing. I should have checked on speaker pricing since it's been a while since I bought mine. Prices have definitely gone up. Just the center channel speaker now costs $250. So yeah, my pricing was wrong. Although with the amps you can get really solid amps with pretty much the same internal components dirt cheap simply due to how systems have moved to HDMI from older connectors. Looking at the amp I got two years ago and my previous one they sound the same and looking through the grill actually internally look the same. However you could get my old amp for less than $100 if you shop around just because the new ones are $300+ depending upon what features they have (multiroom, 4K HDMI, etc.) My old one had only two HDMI ports which was why I got rid of it. The prior generation which had no HDMI plugs on also sounded pretty much the same and again looking internally the analog components looked literally identical although the DSP admittedly didn't do as much.

But yeah, half decent speakers (at least in their list prices) have definitely gone up a lot. So unless you find a killer sale you're talking $700 or more just for the speakers.

In any case this is clearly not a device aimed at that market. My guess is that it'll do moderately well but that Apple will iterate with it. As an aside the high fidelity market may be disappearing. I used to always see a ton of devices aimed at that market. However last time I went to Best Buy it had shrunk a lot. I can't recall the last listening room to test speakers I've seen. So Apple might be right that people are minimizing and this is an increasing underserved market.

I think you”re missing the point a bit. If you can’t reproduce a flat response in a chamber, you’re never going to be able to do so in a normal room. What you’re learning from testing in a chamber is the limit of the devices ability to reproduce a flat response. That’s a useful piece of information.

Then the second question is, how close to that limit does the speaker come in various household situations.

*snip*

No that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that given this:

Quote:

better numbers mean it has the capacity to sound better, now whether it sounds better is an entirely different thing that only you can say. but it's a start.

Then it really doesn’t matter beyond a certain point since there are a. limits to human hearing, b. What sounds “better” is completely subjective and c. Human hearing degraded over time.

Quote:

otherwise those numbers mean diddly squat since usually no one else has the exact same room with the exact same shit in the same place so not reproducible

The numbers only get you so far and let’s not forget that they need to be interpreted and as we know those interpretations can vary a lot, so they very well might seem pointless given that HomePod takes into account dynamic room changes and real-time sensor feedback. It’s simply going to vary because HomePod is not a static (pardon the pun again) functioning speaker. It’s complete dynamic and adaptive. As such, traditional methods of testing might not provide expected results. Those methods might also need to change. Apple upended the playing table. Still, why bother going to such lengths? The methods may very need to change.

It’s the same reaction all over again folks... the music players that were superior. The phone that every incumbent scoffed at, the watch makers writhing in painful disbelief... And now the speaker companies. They’ve just been put on notice.

The numbers are useful to some people as a means of comparison. Numbers don't tell a whole story, nor do I think most people make decisions based solely on numbers. Not everything need be turned into some gladiator subjugation fantasy where Apple rounds up the non-believers and marches them off a cliff.

The Ars review that just went up seems reasonable to me. Sounds great and better than Sonos/Alexa, but Apple can't magically make a 4 inch woofer into an 8 inch woofer. I'll buy that ahead of "it sounds better than any $1000 speaker".

And that’s been my point—what makes a speaker worth $1000? It’s even more ridiculous when the same folks who justify those speaker and HiFi prices point to what they consider to be high $$$ Macs and “$1000 phones”.

And you damn well know the R&D that goes into a Mac or iPhone as well as the tech itself far outstrips any that hours into a speaker.

And you damn well know the R&D that goes into a Mac or iPhone as well as the tech itself far outstrips any that hours into a speaker.

Again, I'm sure it sounds great. That being said, R&D can't outweigh the fact that it's a 4" woofer. It's not going to have the bass response of a larger speaker of similar quality.

Edit: the Ars review said it very well:

Quote:

What the HomePod and Sonos One have in common is that neither can defy physics. The HomePod is still a small speaker, and that means it just doesn’t have the space to generate the trunk-rattling bass and wide soundstage of brawnier alternatives. The sub-bass rumble on Jamie xx’s “Gosh,” an electronic track, just doesn’t dig as deep as it could on a more robust setup. It gives you something—but no knockout blow.